What I have to say about Pope Francis and the FFI

As I have stated yesterday, I prayed it over.

And just as I prayed about it, here comes a wise, I mean, VERY wise piece of advice from Salesian Father Chito Dimaranan, who wrote to address the issue about the Holy Father and the FFI.

For the record, let me say this straight. I love the Latin Mass myself and, in fact, am trying to introduce it where I am. This does not mean, though, that I hate the Ordinary Form of the Mass (which some individuals love to derisively refer to, at times, as "Novus Ordo" (with a lot of parenthetical - if, sarcastic - comments). I also love the liturgy, but not the way some quarters use it as some kind of weapon against those again whom they derisively refer to as "novus ordo priests." I champion fidelity to the GIRM and what is stipulated there, and will obey promptly if and when the authorities decide to revise it. I rally against those who mutilate the ordo, change it arbitrarily, or otherwise add extraneous, outrageous elements not contemplated and stipulated by the General Instruction on the Roman Missal. My fidelity and allegiance is not to a Church of the past, but a living and teaching Church, headed by the Vicar of Christ, the Bishop of Rome, not some vociferous blogger that rains railings and rants from the heavens on a regular basis. I love Pope John Paul II. I love Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. And there is no reason for me to love Pope Francis any less, even as I uphold the "hermeneutics of continuity" in Church Councils and teachings, not excluding the Second Vatican Council!

Here's a quote from Taylor Marshall:
"If you love the Latin Mass, remember that Latin Mass PEOPLE are the greatest enemies of the Latin Mass movement. I love the Latin Mass. However, if I were Pope Francis and read the comments at Rorate Caeli, I’d be tempted to shut it all down. It looks sinful and disgusting from the outside. Keep a lock on your lips. Stay out of traddy online forums/blogs. Pray more. Complain less."

Amen.

And that my friends is what I have to say about this issue.

Amen.

What is so evident in the apostolates of Chupungcan Liturgists

There is a not so old news about Pope Francis defending Summorum Pontificum from Italian bishops who expressed their dismay over the motu propio liberalizing the Traditional Latin Mass.

One salient point mentioned in one of my fave blogs, Hermeneutic of Continuity, that posted this news is the observation of Fr Tim Finigan, owner of the blog about the attitude of these bishops:

"One thing that jumps out of the story is that the bishops of this region judged that their main pastoral priority - to be communicated to the Pope on a five-yearly visit - was to attack Summorum Pontificum. Forget abortion, embryo experimentation, the push for same-sex marriage throughout Europe, the loss of faith of many Catholics and our failure in catechesis and evangelisation. No, the really big problem is a small number of priests legitimately saying the old Mass. Given what Pope Francis has said about the danger of being a self-referential Church, I can well imagine he gave them short shrift."

Quite honestly...THIS is the same attitude of Chupungcan Liturgists!

The likes of Fr. Genaro Diwa, Fr. Reginald Malicdem and all those at the Liturgy helm in the Archdiocese of Manila continue to suppress the implementation of Summorum Pontificum.

To continuously mock in their classes, in seminars, in talks the liturgical teachings and practices of Benedict XVI.

Yeah, of course they are liturgists...but they are also priests!

They owe their obedience to the Pope.  They openly defied this pope when he was still gloriously reigning!  And now that he is emeritus, they continuously mock him!

They have made it their battle cry to fight whatever it is expressed in the motu propio.

Forget the RH Law or even other issues attacking the heart of civilization and Christianity.

What is important is to destroy the teachings of Benedict XVI in the liturgy because for them is more important that contraception, homosexual marriage, divorce and other issues attacking the Church.

Their silence against these issues is deafening!

One of the legacies of the late dean of Filipino liturgist!

God have mercy on his soul!

Just as Fr. Z once blogged, "He did more harm than good."

Diwa

Malicdem

The clerical garb: Unless you are ashamed of it or...

...or you are proud of who you are or...

...you want to play permanent CosPlay.  Ha!

This is going to be a classic!

Fr. Robert Paul Zarate has his own blog, Pari sa Japan, and has written a true classic about the Clerical Collar and Cassock.  Go click here to read the full post.

Makes me wonder why an elderly priest would scold a seminarian aflame with love for God and proud of his vocation just for wearing the garb, uniform proper for his state of life.

Are you ashamed old man?

Here is his advice for those who opted to enter the religious life.

"Dear young seminarian, be always happy and grateful to God for the gift of your vocation and commitment shown through your cassock or your clerical.  Yes, be always grateful.  Never content yourself on the comforts of what ordinary, casual clothes can give you.  Never desire to be “invisible” in this world.  You chose to walk that path to the priesthood, a path that has never taken any “undercover” role in the world of evangelization.  (Leave that  to the lay!)  Take care of that cassock.  Respect it and don’t let it just hang around as some piece of rag.  Take care of your collar.  That collar is meant to be shown, not hidden or tucked in.  Let your cassock and clerical be your instant instrument of evangelization.  Let them also be your instant shield from temptations.  Let them be instant reminders to you and to others that God is just among us... yes, just here among us!"

I am still looking for a valid argument from priests and religious who go around not wearing their cassock or habit.


***

PS:  The note is for priests and seminarians.  Not for any altar server or not for any guy who goes around claiming to be an instituted acolyte or an instituted lay missionary or whatever hockum you could think of to justify the wearing of the collar.

Makes me wonder, to quote Fr. Bob Zarate:

"If you see a Buddhist priest standing and praying with a begging bowl in front of train stations, chances are they are not real Buddhist priests.  They are fake.  They just stand there to collect money for their daily living sans proper work.  Yet, they are dressed to the detail.  I was moved to think that if people who are not really so can dress up well as if they are the real thing, what about a real priest dressing up as a real priest!"

Still it does not justify the fakes one going around dressed up as if they are priests.

I am pretty sure Fr. Bob agrees on this one.

Emancipating the Liturgy, probably the wrong way.

From Fr. Ray Blake, one of my fave priest-bloggers who writes with substance.

Not the kind who throws around blog posts starting with insults.


***

Is this the Per Ipsum?

Before I go any further, I am a great fan of so much of what our Holy Father has to say, especially about the poor, economics and the environment, at least in its reconstituted Vaticanese form, I am a bit uncomfortable with that cameraman that now has a permanent place on the back of the Popemobile but it has become pretty obvious that the Supreme Legislator does not consider the rubrics of the liturgy are that important, in fact it seems as if they can be ignored, or changed at will.  [Pope Benedict has stated in the past that the liturgy belongs to the Church and not to anyone, even the Pope.  Special reminder to professional liturgists who brag about getting their degrees from the Chupungcan School of Liturgical Innovation and Inculturation.]

Benedict taught the liturgy was "a given", we read the black and did the red, Francis seems to be less precise about these things, his liturgy is "emancipated", as he descibes it. [The way he described it when he was asked why he was still keeping Msgr. Guido Marini around.  Marini's is traditional while his is emancipated or in another context "liberated".] Who cares if priests are vested properly? It is obviously "emancipated" to expect concelebrants to wear chasubles, or to expect street clothes the be covered by an amice if necessary, it is emancipated to put flowers on one the corner of an altar and some candles, or are the oil lamps, on the end, with an insignificant crucifix in the middle. It is emancipated to bow rather than genuflect to the tabernacle and after the elevations. It is unemancipated to prepare a homily carefully. It is unemancipated to expect servers to vest, it is emancipated to have the dressed in work uniforms and it is emancipated to have a Bishop take the role of a Deacon.  [BAM!!!]

I want to be emancipated too. I think I might introduce a few prayers at the beginning of the Ordinary Form Mass whilst the choir are singing the Introit. I've a few different but ancient Offertory prayers I would like to introduce and I feel inclined to genuflect before and after each elevation. Now would that be "emancipated" or just plain Pelagian. or what is the other word, "Restorationist"?  [Tit for tat!  I like this!]

Obviously my emancipated choice to celebrate Mass ad apsidum is rubrical according to Missal and a valid option for any priest according to later CDW instructions, so that is not an issue, even if the Pope unlike his two immediate predecessors who chose that option for their daily Mass, chooses not to avail himself of it, but what about "ending", celebrating Mass at he North or South end of the altar, is that emancipated or just plain Protestant?

It is pretty obvious from the Pope's personal liturgical style that any Priest or Bishop can do anything they like in the Ordinary Form, or are there limits?

Balloons and dancing anyone?


***

And I am pretty sure that there is a priest somewhere out there who would think otherwise.  Hell, he can even blog about it, would he?

But I don't think he would do that.

This priest I had in mind does not care about what the Church really teaches about the liturgy, because for one I was totally floored to see his photos celebrating the Ordinary Form of the Mass with tons of liturgical abuse going on around him.  He obviously liked it because he commented that he liked it!  Duh.

What is surprising is that this priest also celebrates the Extraordinary Form of the Mass!

Not surprisingly, he has tons of rubrical mistakes!

Why am I not surprised?

I once learned that he just celebrates the Mass because 'some people' like it, and that he just wanted to be "faithful" to Benedict who issued Summorum Pontificum...

Uhhmmm...

Quite honestly, I have to say that this priest is an example of what is going on in the liturgical universe of the Catholic Church.

This whole Team Benedict - Team Francis liturgy cheering boils down to one thing:  those belonging to both sides see what they want, what they hope for or it legitimizes their lifestyle and their theological and liturgical leanings.

So obviously, priests who love the uber simplicity and uber emancipated liturgies of Pope Francis  hate the "rubrical" and "restorationist" liturgy of Pope Benedict they consider just going with the flow when it comes to the Mass and the Sacraments.

Pope Benedict did what was done a long time ago...To continue the liturgical heritage of the Church.  You don't have to get a degree in liturgy just for this.

But what is troubling is that if the Chief legislator, legislates with his actions and goes to do stuff first before he even writes the legislation down.

Example by action rather than words, eh?

Pope Francis' speaks well on the topic of Church reform and careerism...

But how about him just saying the black and doing the red, no?

Altar boys' cassocks should be!!!

BLACK!

From the great Fr. Z!

***

From a reader:

Is there any significance between altar boys who wear black cassocks as opposed to those who wear red ones in the TLM?

No, there is no significance.  This is a matter of aesthetics.   Back in the day colored cassocks were tolerated by the Sacred Congregation for Rites.  To my mind it is a thing of fairly small importance.

I prefer to see black cassocks… but… hey!

That said, in St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, the servers wear paonazza, the same violet color that monsignors, canons and bishops use.  That is a long established honor.  The boys also attend the Pre-seminario San Pio X.  They are as close to being the chierichetti that chierichetti once were, if that makes any sense.

Also, the MC for a bishop or cardinal often wears paonazza, by custom.  I believe also the guy who carries the end of the prelate’s cappa magna wears paonazza.

The most important thing, however, is that they treat the cassock respectfully. [Read that Teletubbie?!]  It is a privilege to serve at the altar, not a right. [And not a costume either which you just pick up wear, and play dress up as if you were an instituted acolyte which in fact you are not!]  The cassock helps establish a good esprit de corps, which is important for boys.  The cassock is an indication that the boy or man is substituting for a cleric. It could help inspire some of the boys and young men to think about priesthood.  [That is why it is a bad idea to have altar girls.]

UPDATE (brought to you by…..:

A reader asks:

Related to the recent post on the color of cassocks, how do you feel on an alb and cincture being used to replace a cassock and surplus?

Feel?  FEEL?  I feeeeeeeeellllll…..  ill.

(I don’t like it.)

And a surplice is almost never surplus.

On a slightly related note, is there a specific side the cincture hang down on? I believe I heard a seminarian saying that lay people should wear it on one side, and seminarians on the other.

I’ve never heard of such a thing.

This sounds like moving your tassel from one side of your mortar board to the other when you get your diploma.

***

This excellent blog post from Fr. Z leads me to share this!

Nope this is not an ordinary group of folks posing in one of the chapels of the Edsa Shrine after the Mass of His Eminence.

These are a group of altar boys in their "liturgical" barong (ugh!).  When did a cultural garb become a liturgical garb huh?

I love Fr. Nilo and support him 100% but by God!  I beg of him to stop this thing with the altar boys of Edsa Shrine!

THE BARONG IS NOT A LITURGICAL GARB!

At the end of the day, this is how it goes:

If it ain't written, it is illegal.

I don't see cultural dresses being allowed as a liturgical garb.

Unless of course, you try squeezing something out of the liturgical timebombs in recent liturgical documents, like SC.

Right, Fr. Diwa?

Kids "playing" Mass?

I am glad Fr. Z made a post about this after a reader asked a question if kids are committing a sin for simulating Mass.

In fact, that is a very valid question.  In Canon Law, it is very specific what will happen to a person who simulates doing the Mass.

Let us see the entry in the Canon.

Can. 1378 §1. A priest who acts against the prescript of ⇒ can. 977 incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.

§2. The following incur a latae sententiae penalty of interdict or, if a cleric, a latae sententiae penalty of suspension:

1/ a person who attempts the liturgical action of the Eucharistic sacrifice though not promoted to the sacerdotal order; 

A person under interdict forbids that person to celebrate or receive any of the sacraments, including the Eucharist, or to celebrate the sacramentals. One who is under interdict is also forbidden to take any ministerial part (e.g., as a Lector or Acolyte if a layperson or as a deacon or priest if a clergyman) in the celebration of the Eucharist or of any other ceremony of public worship.

These penalties apply to those person who have incurred, as mentioned by the canon, a laetae sententiae interdict or an automatic interdict committed at the time of the offense.

This type of interdict applies to ALL CATHOLICS WHO JOIN FORBIDDEN ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE MASONIC LODGE!

Catholics who are Masons are also forbidden to stand, as the Canon stipulates, as godfather to baptisms, confirmations and weddings!

But getting back...

Kids "playing" Mass, sinning?!

Fr. Z, was right!

They do not!

Why?

Simple!

Kids do not do that with MALICE!

Adults are in the age of reason, and they KNOW that it is wrong to do that, especially if it is not during a stage play!

Kids do it not for fun.  Kids do it because they EMULATE what they see.

See it as more like when we were kids we fool around doing what the Three Stooges do to each other.

Kids playing Mass?  A quick way to foster priestly vocation!

Let me share this video from a good friend of his only son, playing Mass.



PS: If my daughter would do this, she'd be grounded. No more TV! :)

I'd rather buy her a complete set of what Mother Angelica and her nuns are wearing. :)

What happens to the Liturgical Movement after Benedict XVI?

Shawn Tribe, founder and editor of New Liturgical Movement, has a very nice article about this question.

Visit the site to learn more.

Another wonderful blog from a priest

Please read the blog of Fr. Robert Zarate. Beautiful reflection about PORMA priests.

Remember my posts about NARCISSIST PRIESTS???

The guy who loves taking pictures of his vacations? Or the priest who spends more time telling jokes in his homilies? or the one who tries hard to modulate his voice and have liturgical dancers for his Mass at SM?

Yup. PORMA lang!

Compare and contrast their "working clothes".

Here are photos of the priest and his friends...

Fr. Zarate, our blogger priest...


And our other fave priest...

What the????  Is that the waiter???  Even for a waiter, he dresses lousily!

And even for a priest?!  A disaster!

Here is a killer quote from Fr. Zarate:

It is hard when you have already crossed the line of being “like one of the rest”. It is hard to come back to the very ideals you held dear in the very first days of seminary or in the very first years wearing the Cassock or the Roman Collar. Sometimes, I feel like removing this white thing in front of my neck when I am in a public transportation. Sometimes, I feel lazy wearing the cassock. But I have to fight it, in God’s grace. Usual Catholics may say, “Then, don’t wear it. Lots of priests don’t wear it anyway.” Yet, it’s like telling a policeman not to wear his uniform, or a married person not to wear his/her wedding ring. Ah yes... I did not become a priest to become an “undercover” witness of the Gospel. I belong to the more obvious category. In some way, I do not need to open my mouth to tell people that I am a “Man of God”. Rather than be “like the rest of the guys”, rather than do things that even the usual men down the streets can do even in their sleep, if a priest just stays on BEING A PRIEST... he does not need to do any PORMA at all!

BOOM! for the KSP priests!

The return of the Papal Fanon

Yup.

Someone is throwing a nutty fit again.

Oh well.

He and his minions would just think.

"The Pope can do whatever he wants, just as long as it is not done in Manila or in the entire Philippines."

Yup.  That is the plan all along.

Pope Benedict can display all the old liturgical vestments he wants for as long as he does not use his "papal powers" to impose it on all dioceses in the world, including Imperial Archdiocese of Manila who so blatantly and arrogantly issued a directive against a Papal Motu Propio, Summorum Pontificum.  Who wrote it?  Who else?!?!?

Fr. Anscar Chupungco.

But who signed it?

The former archbishop, Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales, benefactor and protector of Fr. Chupungco's Paul VI Institute for Liturgy in Malaybalay, Bukidnon.

But what these liturgical rebels think is just plain liturgical fancy of an old man, is actually a deeper expression of faith and the bringing forth of a worship worth the Lord and Creator of the Universe.

So mass vestments and other devotionals are not just mere externals.  They are an expression of what you feel inside.

So when you over simplify, you get the point.

So when you emphasize more on inculturation of the liturgy, you put more weight on the culture.  Surprising to note that for a liturgical expert to just trash away all the traditional elements of liturgy to tell you that your pious expression is WRONG and that his research on liturgy is right.

Yeah.......for the sake of selling books.

Ugh!

You can read a wonderful article about the Papal Fanon by Fr. Z.

Communion in the Hand is an EXTREME failure!

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK

At our recent celebration of the occasion of First Holy Communion for our young people, I spoke to them about the love of their parents. When they were born, I told them, it wasn’t enough for their parents to simply look at them, or to be with them. A parent’s love for a child is so overwhelming and so powerful that he or she immediately reaches for the most passionate expression of love they can muster which is a kiss.

We tell our children quite rightly and often that God loves them more than anyone else possibly can, that God’s love is greater than any hu­man love. In his writings on the Eucharist, the Holy Father Benedict XVI likens the love of God for us in the Eucharist to giving us a kiss. If this be the case, then reception of the Eucharist in the hand is like giving the Lord a handshake when what He offered was a kiss. We all know what it means when someone refuses a kiss and responds instead with a hand­shake and it doesn’t mean a return of the affection offered.  [Great comparison if you ask me.]

For this and other reasons, I have come to believe that chief among the indults which have abysmally failed to improve Catholic faith and life as promised is this one which touches upon the central act of wor­ship: the permission to replace with Communion in the hand the normal, universal, and noble custom of receiving the Most Holy Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling.  [An indult which wasn't even formally asked of the Holy Father, but was rather an act of defiance orchestrated by the King of Charismatic Movements, the liberal Cardinal Suenens of Belgium, which is happily un-Christian now.  Guess this is the fruit of his work in his country, eh?  By the way, the cardinal is opposed to Humanae Vitae.  You have an idea what he'll say about the RH Bill if he were alive today.  Well, how about same sex marriage? Hmmm...]

If the liturgy is given so that we might grow in adoration and love of Jesus Christ truly present in the Eucharist, then the abuses that I and others have seen which have resulted from the handling of the Eucharist by the faithful are responsible for encouraging not only a diminishment of love for the Eucharistic Lord but even scandal and sacrilege as well. How this disaster is supposed to improve upon the worship of the people of God I cannot say.  [Well, for those in the Bukidnon school think otherwise. Works wonders here, no?  Bah.]


This indult, a special permission granted at the insistence of bishops in office years ago, is one among the other indults which have rendered many celebrations of the Catholic liturgy both unrecognizable from what came before as handed down in the Church from Christ and the apostles and also unrecognizable from the many church services offered by other ecclesial bodies who deny and attack Catholic teaching. In many cases, the indults have served only to distract from the primary purpose of the Sacrifice of the Mass: to meet, know, and love Jesus Christ.  [aka...we don't look different from the Protestants.  In fact a friend who belongs to the High Anglicans said that they now look more Catholic than the post Vatican II Catholics.  Can't complain about it.  He is right.  No wonder there is Anglicanorum coetibus.]

In what way has reception of Communion in the hand served to deep­en reverence or inculcate a more profound belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist? [Don't spend money on surveys.  The results are obvious.  Priests themselves have been complaining....well, those priests who care about their job and not those who care how to look entertaining and relevant and less boring...  Swswswshhhh] For over 40 years we have tried over and over again to explain the proper method for receiving Communion, the bow replacing kneeling and reception in the hand replacing receiving on the tongue.  [Sin of Sloth if you ask me.]

Repeated instructions have failed [like the posters!] to result in any deep or lasting change in behavior as the proposed practice as permitted by the indult has de­generated into a procession no different from that to receive the sacra­mentals of ashes. The communicants in many cases simply march for­ward and stand before the priest or other minister and sometimes hold out one hand like they are getting a handout, “ pop” the Body of the Lord into their mouths in a movement very much failing to reflect the sense that they are receiving One who is not ordinary food, and return to their pews. The indult is too difficult for our faithful and so it is simply not done properly.

There will always be those who have faith strong enough to survive any liturgical changes and who will respectfully adapt to any innovation simply because they would cooperate with anything the Church asks of them. This same group would happily have retained the noble cus­tom of reception on the tongue if they had been left happily enough alone. [They have even removed the kneelers in the pews and even the Communion rails.  Why?  They hate kneeling.  The liberal priests I mean.]

The answer to this disaster appears to be what many priests are now doing. They introduce all first communicants to the noble custom, use the practice for the celebration of First Holy Communion, and offer to all the people of God at every celebration of Holy Mass those things necessary for kneeling and receiving on the tongue in the kneeler and a server with paten.

We are saved by grace through faith in the One we receive really, tru­ly, and substantially in the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist. The manner in which we receive Him affects our faith either for good or ill. Offering the option of receiving on the tongue while kneeling encourag­es those who wish to express the greatest love and reverence for the Lord truly present and invites others to do the same.

[in other words, how can you lift the senses of the faithful into the divine and supernatural when you teach them to approach the supernatural with actions which are so trivial and mundane?  By golly!  Sticking out your hand even if it were cupped like how it was quoted from St. Cyril (albeit out of context ala Iglesia ni Cristo), does not teach the person the sense of the sacred!  Can you just go out and shake the hand of the Queen of England or the POTUS?  Hell no.  Then here come the priest who treat the Lord as if he were just a mere arcade coin token.  Goodness!]

***

The Church has granted indults.  Communion in the Hand is one of them and it is not only permitted by most bishops and priests, it is even being promoted.  Remember how the troops of Frs. AC and GD made posters on dressing properly for Mass and the proper way of receiving Communion in the Hand?  Yeah.

How about the proper way of receiving Communion directly on the tongue?

Where are the posters for that?

There are other indults in the Church right?

This one is the most recent.

Where is your poster for this Fr. Diwa?

Will you have the same gusto to promote this just as you promote this manner of receiving the Lord?

I'll repeat it once again.


COMMUNION IN THE HAND IS A LITURGICAL ABUSE AND AN ABOMINATION AND MUST BE STOPPED IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ASAP!

I am not shouting.  I am drilling a point.

Probably exasperated that this manner of communion is still not stopped, univesally.

Sign the petition now!

Look for the link in the left-hand bar.

PS:  Read this article about how the ugly practice of Communion in the Hand.  And visit the website dedicated to eradicating this practice.

Vatican II is not God!

A direct quote from a very insightful post of Fr. Allan McDonald of Southern Orders blog:

***

At another blog, a sociologist made the following observation:

"By and large Vatican II was successful. Both the Liturgy and the Bible have become more accessible to the laity. Ecumenically and interfaith wise, Catholics are understanding other groups and collaborating better with them. More Catholics experience their families, work and communities as places where they are called to holiness.


What has not worked well has been collegiality: collegiality among bishops with the pope, collegiality among priests with their bishop; collegiality among people with their pastor. In all cases persons in charge have tended to be dissatisfied with “democracy.” While having formal processes of “consultation,” these do not influence decision making..."

We can say that Vatican II was successful, but we cannot say that it is successful if we look at the attrition rate of Catholics practicing their faith since the Second Vatican Council as only 20% are attending the successful and accessible liturgy of the Church. And of those 20% there is not always agreement on what is successful and accessible, in fact there is downright division and each person thinks their opinion is valid and all opinions are valid even if the opinion is opposed to what the Church actually teaches about this, that or the other.

What has not worked well: "Collegiality" is probably true as so often collegiality proposes false expectations of a democratic dynamic not only in administration where it could work well and be valid, but in Church teaching where the "voice of the people" including the voices of the clergy can be downright wrong, heterodox or even heretical. Ultimately the pope, the bishop in his diocese or the pastor of the parish after consulting has the canonical right to make a decision and sometimes in the areas of faith and morals no real consultation is needed or required except for pastoral reasons and the input that helps highlight what needs to be done and more importantly explained.

But even if the observation that collegiality is a sore point with Catholics, just how many Catholics of the 20% that attend Mass? 1%? 2%, 10%???? And of the 80% who no longer attend Mass, just how important is collegiality amongst them 1%? 2% or 100%? That would be an interesting sociological survey. My personal feeling from merely anecdotal evidence is that the vast majority of Catholics, 99.9% of them, practicing or not, don't give a flip about institutional collegiality in the Church, only Catholics involved in decision making in the Church seem to obsess on this.

Vatican II is not God; Collegiality is not God; Ecclesiology is not God; Lay participation in the Mass is not God! God is God and if God is not believed as the Church teaches and celebrates His action within Salvation History from start to finish, then, Houston, WE HAVE A PROBLEM!

Your humble thoughts on this?


***

Huh?!

Successful?

In what terms?

Let me drill on this one by one.

Vatican II was successful.  Yeah....in that it was organized.  Ha!

Vatican II emphasized the use of the vernacular in the Liturgy which to some extent really helped bring some positive change in the world.  I have read in more than a couple of posts from more credible liturgists and theologians (Ha!) that what was expected was that the Mass would have more vernacular and less of the Latin, most especially vernacular in the readings and the Latin remains in the common parts of the Mass especially the prayers of the priest.  What happened is an alleged Mass that looks the same (DAW!) from the ancient Mass (DAW!) that the early Christians in Rome practiced (DAW!).

Pius XII warned against antiquarianism and this is what San Beda and Malaybalay kept on insisting.

On the issue of collegiality, it will never work.  Look at how happily disoriented the Anglican and Episcopalian communion are?  Look at how the Islamic world is tearing each other apart.  Everyone wants to be Pope!  It will never work.  Democracy will never work in the Church that was founded to have a supreme pastor and leader.  Look at the Council of Jerusalem was conducted.  When Peter spoke up, everybody shut up.  Questions?

So for the aging hippie priests who still teach subjects in theology about collegiality, consultation, lay empowerment, women's involvement, inculturated and animated liturgy, dialogue with religion, preaching in the margins, BEING CHURCH...........

ALL BALONEY!

Tick tock tick tock tick tock....

There is a new breed of Catholics being born every second around the world.

And they do not think like you.

Because the modernist theology you teach does not encourage young men to become priests or brothers nor do they encourage women to become women who are submissive to authority and who would rather serve in silence.  Modenist nuns love to hate men.  Oftentimes, They crave positions of authority and they would grab at every opportunity to be the leader and make slaves out of men.

That is what Modernism is:  STERILE and BARREN.

It does not reproduce.  They agree to disagree and fight each other once their common enemy, anything of the Catholic past, is mentioned.  They do not inspire for a higher good, something of the supernatural.  They always crave for the here and know.  Modernists will always tend to satisfy the senses, makes you feel good, but does not make you feel uncomfortable.  That is why you will never hear them talk about the Four Last Things.  Death, Judgment, Heaven, Hell.  They will always talk to you about blessings, happiness, miracles, but not about the things WE NEED to prepare once this EARTHLY LIFE is over.

So, for Vatican II?  We need a clearer interpretation of what the Council Documents really meant.  That is why I fully support the views of Bishop Athanasius Schneider in that the Holy Father issue a Syllabus of Errors in defining Vatican II, one of which is "this phenomenon can be seen in three liturgical practices that are fairly well known and widespread in almost all the parishes of the Catholic sphere: the almost complete disappearance of the use of the Latin language, the reception of the Eucharistic body of Christ directly in the hand while standing, and the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice in the modality of a closed circle in which priest and people are constantly looking at each other."

So, you ask now, why I call out erring priests and bishops in their liturgical practice?

Together with Fr. Byles: Apostles of Mercy on board the Titanic

Fr. Joseph Benedikt Peruschitz

Fr. Juozas Montvila

 My good friend Anita Moore, OP (yup she is a tertiary Dominican. Tertiaries like her have a strict rule of life, often going into a Dominican Novitiate, the formation lasting for 5 years, not months. Just saying.)

Well, anywho...

The post of Ms. Moore relates the story not only of Fr. Thomas Byles, which I posted here recently, but also of other priests who died with the sinking of the Titanic.

Head on over to her blog, to spike her site hits and also feel free to comment. :)

How to celebrate Divine Mercy Sunday

Courage Philippines has posted an interesting article on how to celebrate Divine Mercy Sunday.

Go check out the post.

And by the way, the novena to the Divine Mercy started on Good Friday, just in case you forgot.

A beautiful article/blog post about St. Joseph

Visit this post from the website of the Servants of the Lord and the Virgin of Matará.

It is a very concise yet packed with beautiful info about this dearly beloved patron of the Church.

For young traditionalist men who want to become priests

The great blogger, Father John Zuhlsdorf has a very wise advice for all of you!

Back in the dark days of the 80′s when in my seminary to have a statue of Our Lady of Fatima or to say the rosary in public meant expulsion, I came up with the Six Rules of Seminary Survival. Where you are they may still pertain:

Rarely affirm.
Never deny.
Seldom make distinctions.
Smile a lot.
Say very little.
Never wear black.

In my day, it was as if we were officers-in-training, but in the military academy of the enemy. That seems like the situation there.

This is what you must do: learn what these modernist oppressors have to teach, parrot it back to them, and read good books on your own, with a flashlight and shades drawn if necessary.

And if you have to give up the internet, then for the love of God and His Holy Church give it up.

Get ordained.

Your day will come.

There will be time after ordination to learn the TLM and build up that dimension of the formation they are – contrary to the Church’s law – cheating you out of.

For the sake of that day, be quiet and make sacrifices of your desire to surf around as you will.

If you have to, you can – believe me – hang by your thumbs until your hands are anointed.


Do not, by fighting or reacting suddenly, give those… aging-hippy modernists anything to beat you with.

Once you are ordained, with a joyful smile and in charity destroy their life’s work.

***

I have known a couple of friends who swear they could have just shut the hell up and played politics just to get ordained!  :D

And I know a couple who did just that and raised their nutty professors into a frenzy for "coming out" and showing their true Traddie colors!

Well, "destroying their life's work" is what some of Fr. A's students are doing, eh?

Read the entire post here.

And don't forget to vote for his blog!

So to those wanting to enter the seminary and have this knack to hunt for liberals and modernists...

Heed Fr. Z's advice!

Ranting about your Anathema sit won't get you anywhere!

And the Church is found on both East and West, North and South.  So, stop your obsession about directions, ok?!

Solemn High Mass!!!

The parish priest Fr. Jojo Zerrudo, of Holy Family Parish in Roxas District, Quezon City, spared NOTHING to celebrate the patronal feast of his new parish...complete with Knights of Columbus Honor Guards, which I learned was led by a friend.

The Solemn High Mass in the Extraordinary Form was offered by a Canon Jean Marie Moreau of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest (ICRSS)

For more, visit Fr. Zerrudo's blog.

How to celebrate Halloween, the Catholic way

Taylor Marshall of Cantervury Tales has an interesting post about doing the All Hallow's eve celebration....the Catholic way.

He posted this last year and still makes for a good read.

Click here for more.

You can also read this interesting post from the "Association of Catholic Women Bloggers" about the Catholic way of doing things in this highly secularized commemoration of All Saint's Day Eve.

The demonic forces are being paraded on the streets. Why not people worth emulating like the saints, eh?

A brief background, Halloween has its origins from the Celtic festival for Samhain, the Celtic god of the dead, or in some literature, a demon who roams the earth together with otehr vile creatures on Oct. 31. According to legend, people dress up looking like the dead or other scary creature to confuse Samhain, thinking that he is looking at one of his kind because if he sees a human being, he would kill the person or possess the person. So in a way, the festival of dressing up like scary creatures is a way of "escaping the wrath of Samhain", more like a paganistic ritual. The TV series, Supernatural, even had one episode about this.

So, if you want to teach a valuable Catholic lesson to your kids, dress them up as saints and angels. Not as demons or zombies.

You don't want your kids to know more about these vile creatures in exchange for sweets.

The bishop's conference of England and Wales also made the similar appeal last year.

A bishop witnesses a liturgical abuse

And decides not to confess to the priest who did that.

Because he is afraid he might change the formula of absolution.

The bishop also further opines why there is a rise in the interest in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

I just wondered why he did not approach the priest and asked him what he did.

Just wondering.

Head on over to What Does the Prayer Really Say to read about this great blog post.

Great new blog and great blog post!

Rarely have I chanced upon a great blog and get a great blog post all in one day.

I chanced upon, by the grace of God, a wonderful new blog, The New Theological Movement. Fr. Ryan Erlenbush, wrote this wonderful reflection about yesterday's Gospel about the multiplication of the loaves and fishes and how he calls out by name, the Modernists, who claim that there was no miracle of the multiplication of the loaves and bread, rather, Christ inspired the people to share their food with each other.

Kind of idiotic, if you ask me. Why?  Would thousands of men, not including women and children, go around following Christ and her his lesson, bringing the same provisions, bread and fish?

Here is an excerpt of Fr. Ryan's post.

Taking the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, he said the blessing, broke the loaves, and gave them to the disciples, who in turn gave them to the crowds. They all ate and were satisfied.

It is well known how the modernist and rationalist interpreters of Sacred Scripture will attempt to twist the multiplication of the loaves (indeed, we should say “multiplications”, since Jesus did this more than once) from a miracle into an instance of sharing.

“It wasn’t a miracle,” they tell us. “Or, rather, the miracle was that our Lord got the people to share!” Now, I don’t intend here to point out that such “scholars” have little understanding of the Gospels – how the event is clearly related as a miracle, how the crowds (according to St.  John) wanted to make Jesus a political King on account of the fact that he could solve all their material problems with his power, how our Savior himself reminds the Apostles that he had fed the multitudes with only some loaves and a few fish (remember, he was with them on the boat and told them to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees).

Read more here.

Was Mass facing the people envisoned by Vatican 2?

How interesting to see that even after Vatican II, the mind of the authorities implementing the changes regarding the orientation of the celebrant (whether facing the eastern wall of the church or facing the people) NEVER RECOMMENDED THAT THE WHOLE MASS BE CELEBRATED FACING THE PEOPLE.

***

To read the excellent discussion about ad orientem worhsip, which Pope Benedict XVI himself has done, visit the Filipino Roman blog.